Destroyer USS The Sullivans Damaged After Missile Explodes After Launch, No Injuries Reported

USNI News ^ | July 22, 2015 | Sam LaGrone

[sukhoi-30mki]

More pix at source

[ASA Vet]

Who or what damaged the ship AFTER the missile exploded?

[PapaBear3625]

My guess would be the fire the missile started.

[mcshot]

I’m thinking sabotage.

[riverrunner]

High explosive going off that close to something well cause some damage.

[Arm_Bears]

What was the price tag on that missile?

For that much money, why the hell did it malfunction?

[The_Victor]

High explosive going off that close to something well cause some damage.

The missile was unarmed. The damage was from the shower of solid propellant that exploded. There's no "mechanism" in engine of a solid fuel rocket (just propellant, burn chamber, and nozzle), so there's actually very little that can go wrong with them. Pretty much the only way they explode is if something blocks the nozzle.

[Jack Hydrazine]

Maybe John McCain was visiting the ship?

[ASA Vet]

Seems that would occur during the explosion not AFTER.

[Rummyfan]

High explosive going off that close to something well cause some damage.

The article states there was no warhead on the missile. The fire and explosion must have been caused by the fuel.

[Rummyfan]

A missile, whether a ground-launched biggie like an ICBM, a cruise variety (GLCM or ALCM), or shipboard or submarine, or even an anti-tank TOW, is an extremely complicated piece of gear.

[ProtectOurFreedom]

Warhead didn’t explode. Rocket propellant did.

[ProtectOurFreedom]

Or manufacturing problem with propellant or cracks in casing.

[Red Steel]

A cracked solid propellant rocket motor would do it.

[Arm_Bears]

I’m aware of that—Used to do defense work.

The things don’t come cheap, and for them and the launch control system to not work properly is extremely troubling.

See the F-35 debacle.

[Lower Deck]

I’m thinking sabotage.

Then you would think they'd sabotage it in a way that would do more damage to the ship, like blowing up in the launch tube. Missiles get old, they fail on rare occasions, there is nothing suspicious in this.

[mad_as_he$$]

No warhead.

[T-Bird45]

Good to see I wasn’t the only one with that as a first thought.

[The_Victor]

Or manufacturing problem with propellant or cracks in casing.

I would expect basic quality checks during manufacturing to catch manufacturing issues; it's just a tube, packed with propellant, plugged at one end, nozzle at the other. Damage during handling would be my first suspicion.

[central_va]

Hecho en Mexico, well there is your problemo....